Kegan Butler 14.1 and 14.2

14.1

In the classroom that I am observing in, the fourth grade students are currently learning how to sequence events in a story in the order in which they happened.  If I were giving a lesson on sequencing, I would first discuss with my students the meaning and process of sequencing. Next I would give my students a fictional story to read within a small group. As the students are reading, I would first perform an informal assessment and ask the students questions about the order of events in the story up to the point that they had read. After all the students had finished reading, I would have them individually write about the story and the sequence of events in their journal. Then I would have the students return to their groups where I would give them several “events” from the story on colored pieces of paper and have them lay the pieces of paper out in the order in which they happened together. Lastly, I would have them individually sequence the events in the story on a formal assessment such as a worksheet. 

14.2

My first instinct is to say that norm-referenced assessments are superior. Assessing students based off of the performance of their peers seems more reasonable than holding students accountable to a specific standard. Norm-referenced assessments can measure how students compare to one another not only in the local school but at a national level as well. One reason I like this type of assessment is because I do not think that it is necessarily fair to hold all students to one set criteria. The advantage of a norm-referenced assessment is that using this assessment makes clear how students compare with their peers. This helps teachers to know where their students are in comparison with one another so that they can better instruct their students. Teachers are better able to identify those students who are exceptionally gifted and those with disabilities. Another advantage is that this assessment can better account for test questions that are not appropriate for the student’s level. If all of the students miss that question, they are not penalized. Also, norm-referenced assessments help to account for questions that some students from a different cultural or socioeconomic background might not know the answer to. However, the disadvantage to norm-referenced assessment is that it does not show specifically what students have learned. Therefore, norm-referenced assessment would not be an accurate way to measure a students’ progress over a long period of time. Criterion-referenced assessments reveal exactly what students have learned. This type of assessment most accurately tracks students’ progress over time. Another advantage of the criterion-referenced assessment is that it best measures students’ mastery of the curriculum instead of their mastery in comparison with one another. I think that it would be helpful as a teacher to have both types of assessment so that you could benefit from both of their advantages while covering the gaps of their disadvantages.